In response to the years long movement demanding implementation of an
Inner Line Permit System in Manipur, the Government of Manipur recently
passed three bills; the Protection of Manipur People Bill
2015, the Manipur Land Revenue and Land Reforms Amendment Bill 2015,
and the Manipur Shops and Establishments Bill 2015. These bills have
been achieved after prolonged struggle that have affected most of the
people (in Manipur) in some way or the other such as heavy repressions,
casualties, arrests, riots, destructions of properties and obstructions
to the normal functioning of democratic order.

Some sections of the population, however, have expressed
dissatisfaction to the bills. The hard core pro ILP Sections felt that
their demands have not been fully fulfilled by these bills. They
considered that the Government still enjoys the power to sell land to
the outsiders. Economically powerful outsiders can still buy land, if
they are being favoured by those who are with the administration. There
is no clear cut provision on the protection of the local labour and
professionals, as outsider employees are exempted from the permit
system. Whereas registered local entrepreneurs who fail to get their
employees registered had to be penalised, there is no penalty against
outsiders who would violate the provisions of the bills, such as entry
without a valid pass or who fail to get their name registered in the
concerned Directorate. There is also no provision on the detection of
the landowner outsiders and corresponding actions to be taken up
against them.

The bills have been openly opposed by the ‘tribal’ organisations, who
claimed control of the Manipur Hill districts, particularly those of
the Kuki Chin Mizo communities. They started feeling insecure as many
of them, either those who probably immigrated to Manipur after 1951 or
whose lineages may not be found in the list criteria mentioned in the
Bills, could be legally treated as outsiders and lose their landed
rights. The other tribes have also expressed the similar concern. While
trying to project the bills as pro-Meetei, they fail to see that no one
who come after 1951 is exempted from the permit system, including some
sections of the Meeteis and others who came to Manipur after 1951. What
they have argued is that the cut-off base year 1951, to detect
outsiders, would be redundant in regards to those settled immigrants
after 1951 who have close ethnic ties with the one or the other
‘indigenous’ community. However, this insecurity interplayed with the
propaganda that the Manipur Land Revenue and Reform Act 1960 have been
extended to the hill districts, which is untrue as there is no
amendment in the territorial extent of the said Act.

The resentment against the bills, which have affected Churachandpur,
Kangpokpi and Moreh towns and other hill areas could not have been
escalated into the present scale of unrest, had the Government of
Manipur consulted the Hill Areas Committee or other responsible
‘tribal’ organisations to resolve any misunderstanding before passing
the bills. The Government of Manipur had been lacking transparent in
this regards; to the extent that these bills had not been made
officially public till date. On the other-hand there has been inherent
sectarianism of the civil societies that are either in favour of or
against these bills. Neither the organisation that had led the ILP
movement nor the tribal organisations who protest the bills had
approached one another for a dialogue and understanding in this
regards. From the beginning the ILP movement was mostly confined in the
Valley Districts, while those in the Hills have isolated themselves
from the movement thinking that they have been protected from outsiders
under the existing laws. There were avoidable conflicts had these
organisations had pursued for democratic solution to any of the complex
issues. Now, when tensions have been spread due to misunderstanding and
absence of dialogue, there seem to be roles of certain vested
political groups to add fuel to the fire to topple down the incumbent
congress ministry through the imposition of President Rule.

Our concern, however, is that all these unrests, rioting and repression
has led to heavy toll and casualty on the civilians, destruction of
properties and communal mistrusts. The common peoples are the losers in
this conflict; as we know, the elite will negotiate at the negotiation
table and share any form of loot from the public fund. We question:
what are these bills that have caused dissatisfactions and
misunderstandings to different sections of the population? Is there no
room to either clarify the misunderstanding or add some clauses in the
bills to resolve the immediate tension? Can the ‘indigenous insiders’
protect themselves from outsiders without promoting mutual trust,
respect and co-operation amongst themselves? What the people need to
realise is that they are trapped by the same fate of political betrayal
and marginalisation. Unless they fight collectively on the basis of
mutual respect and consensus, they are the losers. We, therefore, call
for a dialogue among the civil society organisations, political
parties, and other stake holders on the Manipur People Protection Bill
2015 and the amendment in other two bills.